in the hands of the members of the upper and middle classes, who derived their incomes from lending and employing them.  They were to those classes in the old world what canals, railroads, steam-engines, &c., are to those of modern days.  Some Roman citizens had as many as five thousand slaves educated to the one occupation of gladiators for the public shows of Rome.  Julius Caesar had this number in Italy waiting his return from Gaul; and Gordianus used commonly to give five hundred pair for a public festival, and never less than one hundred and fifty.

In India slavery is happily but little known;[a] the church had no hierarchy either among the Hindoos or Muhammadans; nor had the law any high interpreters.  In all its civil branches of marriage, inheritance, succession, and contract, it was to the people of the two religions as simple as the laws of the twelve tables; and contributed just as little to the support of the aristocracy as they did.  In all these respects, China is much the same; the land belongs to the sovereign, and is minutely subdivided among those who farm and cultivate it—­the great works in canals, aqueducts, bridges, roads, &c., are made by Government, and yield no private income.  Capital is nowhere concentrated in expensive machinery; their church is without a hierarchy, their law without barristers-their higher classes are therefore composed almost exclusively of the public servants of the Government.  The rule which prescribes that princes of the blood shall not be employed in the government of provinces and the command of armies, and that the reigning sovereign shall have the nomination of his successor, has saved China from a frequent return of the scenes which I have described.  None of the princes are put to death, because it is known that all will acquiesce in the nomination when made known, supported as it always is by the popular sentiment throughout the empire. [W.  H. S.]

a. the anthor’s statement that in the year 1836 slavery was ’but little known in India’ is a truly astonishing one.  Slavery of various kinds—­racial, predial, domestic—­the slavery of captives, and of debtors, had existed in India from time immemorial, and still flourished in 1836.  Slavery, so far as the law can abolish it, was abolished by the Indian Act v of 1843, but the final blow was not dealt until January l, 1862, when sections 370, &c., of the Indian Penal Code came into force.  In practice, domestic servitude exists to this day in great Muhammadan households, and multitudes of agricultural labourers have a very dim consciousness of personal freedom.  The Criminal Law Commissioners, who reported previous to the passage of Act v of 1843, estimated that in British India, as then constituted, the proportion of the slave to the free population varied from one-sixth to two-fifths.  Sir Bartle Frere estimated the slave population of the territories included in British India in the year 1841 as being between eight and nine millions.  Slaves were